GitHub and Check Point CloudGuard WAF are competitors in the software tools market, focusing on source code management and application security, respectively. GitHub seems to have the upper hand for collaboration due to its extensive integrations and community support.
Features: GitHub's notable features include Git Hooks, SSH keys, and advanced security, offering robust options for managing code efficiently and securely. Its cloud-hosted services and seamless integrations with tools like Jenkins and Jira enhance its collaborative capabilities. On the other hand, Check Point CloudGuard WAF excels with AI-driven threat prevention, automated policy management, and seamless cloud integration, effectively supporting complex security needs.
Room for Improvement: GitHub encounters challenges with limited project management features, integration complexities, and UI issues. Users often mention slow upload speeds and a notably steep learning curve. For CloudGuard WAF, desired improvements include better documentation, faster support, and enhanced integration capabilities. Some users find its setup process cumbersome and report inconsistencies in its user interface.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: GitHub benefits from strong community support, which reduces the need for direct technical assistance, although official support can be inconsistent. Similarly, CloudGuard WAF is praised for its customer service and technical assistance but could improve support responsiveness and documentation.
Pricing and ROI: GitHub is recognized for its cost-effectiveness, particularly with its free and open-source offerings, offering significant value to organizations using premium versions despite cumbersome account management. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is considered costly; however, its comprehensive security features justify the price. Users acknowledge its benefits in providing substantial security ROI relative to some alternatives.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
The technical support from GitHub is generally good, and they communicate effectively.
Some forums help you get answers faster since you just type in your concern and see resolutions from other engineers.
I have not used GitHub's technical support extensively because there are many resources and a robust knowledge base available due to the large user community.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
It handles increasing traffic easily because we can extend our demands based on our needs.
We have never had a problem with scalability, so I would rate it at least eight to nine.
GitHub is more scalable than on-prem solutions, allowing for cloud-based scaling which is beneficial for processing large workloads efficiently.
It is very stable.
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
If a skilled developer uses it, it is ten out of ten for stability.
It provides a reliable environment for code management.
GitHub is mostly stable, but there can be occasional hiccups.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
It's not something you manipulate, it's not an antivirus where you deal with signatures, updates, and upgrades every day.
I would say that the more automation this product has, the easier it will be to work with it.
One area for improvement in GitHub could be integration with other tools, such as test management or project management tools.
I would like to see some AI functionality included in GitHub, similar to the features seen in GitLab, to enhance productivity.
When solving merge conflicts, it would be helpful to have tooltips within the actions to know what changes could happen next when resolving a conflict.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
Normally, GitHub is not expensive, but it would be welcome if it reduces costs for developing countries.
The pricing of GitHub is reasonable, with the cost being around seven dollars per user per month for private repositories.
The pricing of GitHub depends on the choice of solutions, such as building one's own GitHub Runners to save money or using GitHub's Runners with extra costs.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
The pull request facility for code review.
GitHub Actions allow for creating multiple jobs that run in different stages such as build, test, and deploy, which enable better visibility and control over the deployment pipeline.
For branching, it works well, especially in an agile environment.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF (Web Application Firewall) is a cloud-native security solution designed to protect web applications and APIs from known and unknown threats. It employs contextual AI and machine learning to prevent zero-day attacks without relying on traditional signature-based detection methods, ensuring that applications remain secure even as new threats emerge.
CloudGuard WAF offers preemptive protection against vulnerabilities by using machine learning to identify and block zero-day threats like Log4Shell and Spring4Shell. It provides precise detection capabilities, minimizing the need for constant fine-tuning and reducing false positives. Designed for cloud-native environments, CloudGuard WAF integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, supporting automated deployment and configuration through infrastructure as code (IaC) or APIs.
Key Features of CloudGuard WAF:
Benefits of CloudGuard WAF:
CloudGuard WAF is particularly suitable for organizations using modern, cloud-based architectures that require robust, automated security measures for both applications and APIs. Its capabilities are valuable for industries that handle sensitive data, such as finance or healthcare, where compliance and data protection are critical. Pricing and support are typically customized to the specific needs and scale of the deployment, with options for continuous updates and maintenance through Check Point's managed services.
CloudGuard WAF by Check Point provides advanced, AI-driven protection for web applications and APIs, offering automated, precise threat prevention and easy integration with cloud-native environments, ensuring robust security without the need for extensive manual configuration.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.